DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 LCC:ddj
Docket No: 2756-01
12 June 2001
This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the
provisions of title 10 of the United States Code, section 1552.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive
session, considered your application on 12 June 2001. Your allegations of error and injustice
were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the
proceedings of this Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your
application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and
applicable statutes, regulations and policies. In addition, the Board considered the advisory
opinion furnished by CMC memorandum 4050.1K LFT-3-WC of 21 May 2001, a copy of which
is attached.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the
evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice. In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in
the advisory opinion. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and votes of
the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken.
You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and material
evidence or other matter not previously considered by the Board. In this regard, it is important
to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official records. Consequently,
when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to
demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
Enclosure
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON, DC 20380-1775 4050.1K
LFT-3-Wc
21 May O1
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION
OF NAVAL RECORDS
Subj: PETITION OF CAPTAI
Ref: (a) Joint Federal Travel Regulations
MENG shipped household goods (HHG) from
aoe Japan and from Jacksonville, North Carolina to
Camp Pendleton, California. His household goods shipment
weight totaled 16,014 pounds that resulted in excess costs
being incurred by the member for exceeding his maximum
weight entitlement of 14,500 pounds.
2. A service member in the grade of Captain is authorized
shipment of up to 14,500 pounds of household goods at
Government expense. These limits are prescribed in the
reference. A service member who exceeds their maximum
weight entitlement is liable for all excess costs incurred.
3. A service member cannot plan the shipment of personal
property based on future promotions, nor can a change or
cancellation of an assignment be considered in prescribing
weight allowances, as they are determined by Congress and
are law.
4. This Headquarters has determined that the Pay Adjustment
Authorization is correct as issued, and we are unable to
recommend a favorable determination of this case.
By direction
~
Using the cube rule, ECAF increased the weight for professional books, papers, and equipment (PBP&G), from 50 pounds to 960 pounds for the unaccompanied baggage (UB) shipment and credited 457 pounds for missing and irreparably damaged items for the household goods (HHG) shipment that moved from Germany to England. JPPSO/CC indicates the applicant submitted an amendment to his original application in which he states he made another PCS move from England back to Germany and he was not...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02714
The Government Bill of Lading (GBL) weight for moving his household goods exceeded the maximum allowable weight authorized by the Joint Federal Transportation Regulation (JFTR) allowance of 14,500 pounds There appears to be a gross weight miscalculation on the weight charged by the contract carrier. With the error of JPPSO failing to weigh his shipment, there is no way to determine the correct weight of his household goods shipment. Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02970
ECAF states when it is impossible or impractical to weigh a shipment on certified scales, if approved by the traffic management officer, the shipment weight may be constructed by multiplying 40 pounds times the number of inventory line items. The ECAF evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In response to the Air Force advisory opinion, the applicant points out that there was...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01643
______________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ECAF recommends denial and states the applicant did not provide any evidence to support a probable error or an injustice. His shipment had a new weight of 12,640 pounds. The applicant’s statement that there was no indication of his shipment being overweight at the time of the move is without merit.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120022030
On 18 October 2012, after the applicant submitted a re-weight memorandum for record, officials at the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1 and G-4, reviewed the applicant's request to waive the indebtedness resulting from exceeding his prescribed weight allowance. The documents provided by the applicant regarding his request for an increased HHG weight allowance during his PCS family move from Fort Wainwright, Alaska to Germany were reviewed. As a result, the Board recommends that all...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002082281C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT STATES : That the HHG weight allowance for a career enlisted soldier serving in the rank of sergeant major (SGM) is unjustly low when compared to that of a junior grade officer. In June 2002, the applicant submitted a request to have his debt remitted or cancelled.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01035a
He made two shipments of personal property from Korea to San Antonio, TX. Considering the weight credits for packing materials and professional books, papers, and equipment, he exceeded the prescribed weight allowance for his grade by 450 pounds, incurring the excess cost charge of $409.99. He now requests relief of the portion of his debt resulting from exceeding his maximum weight allowance.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090006155
The orders also stated that "shipment of HHG [household goods] and travel allowances are authorized up to 180 days following date of discharge" and identified the applicant's home of record as Sunbury, OH. The applicant provides a one-way rental agreement from Penske Truck Leasing, dated 6 October 2008, which shows that he rented a vehicle on 6 October 2009 for a cost of $716.00. The applicant personally procured transportation and moved his household goods to his home of record before the...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00839
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: DFAS-POCC/DE recommends denial and states after contacting the Remissions and Waiver Branch for a recommendation, that office notified them had they received the applicant’s remission request prior to his separation, they would have recommended the debt be collected in full. Applying this method to the fourth shipment produced a net weight of 3,120 pounds (78 inventory times 40 pounds), at a cost of...
Regarding the three different weights of his household goods, the Comptroller General has ruled in similar cases that evidence of the weight of household effects when placed in nontemporary storage is not determinative of the member’s liability because a higher weight when the goods are taken out of storage may be due to several factors, including the use of different scales, the use of storage material which is not removed before shipping, and moisture absorption while in storage. This...